Zev Porat

Sunday, September 30, 2018

Why I am Historical Pre-Millennial and not Pre-Tribulation.

Please understand my ultimate position in this matter. Eschatology (primarily the study of last things and, often, the
“timing” of the rapture of the church), in my opinion, is not a teaching that should cause any of us to
divide fellowship with our fellow brothers and sisters who are genuinely born
again, and serious seekers of biblical truth. I have had several Christians part fellowship with me because my view
is different than theirs, but that has never
been the case on my part.

So, why am I a proponent
of historical premillennialism, and not a pre-tribulation rapture believer? Without
trying to sound trite, the short answer is simple:

“Because the historical
pre-millennial view (henceforth referred to as the HPM view) was the prevailing
view (almost exclusively) of the first 300 years of Christian scholarship, and demonstrably
remained so for the next 1,500 years. And, because the pre-trib view is clearly and contextually not what Jesus taught.”

I will thoroughly, and contextually, demonstrate both of those assertions in what follows.

The Historical View?

The plain truth of the
matter is that the PT (pre-tribulation) doctrine is a relatively new teaching,
especially in its current pervasive form. The advent of certain books (i.e., Left Behind series), movies, and
internet video and blog platforms have gone a long way in making the PT
teaching even more popular. But, it was not the prevalent historical view, nor
is it what the Bible actually says – within
its most literal context.

First, let’s settle the
matter of which view has the preponderance of historical and biblical evidence behind it. The answer is best
addressed, believe it or not, by one of the most renowned and staunchest of the
PT teachers in America today – Dr. David Reagan. I know Dr. Reagan personally.
I have been on many of his television broadcasts. He wrote the Foreword to one
of my bestselling books "The Rabbi Who Found Messiah" and I have subsequently
spent many hours of personal time with him. The very first day we met, in the DFW airport, I told him exactly where I stood on eschatology. I told him, because it was one of the first questions he asked me that day.

I am using Dr. Reagan’s
quotes to demonstrate that regardless of the
number of people who continually insist that the PT doctrine was taught by
“numerous” early scholars - and that the rest of us are simply ill-informed for
thinking and saying otherwise – they first need to settle this issue with one
of their most widely known PT teachers, who flatly disagrees with them.

A number of PT teachers
will often contend that to interpret the Bible in any other way, other than the PT view, is to interpret the Bible in a non-literal fashion. Some of those
of the PT persuasion will even go so far as to call any other idea to be downright heresy. Again, Dr. Reagan disagrees with those
who say these things. In fact, what he writes about this issue may shock you - especially if you've been dogmatically holding to the PT view. Prepare yourself.

The following quotes are
from Dr. David Reagan's book – “Wrath and Glory” pp. 112 and 113.

“The oldest viewpoint [about the doctrine of the rapture] is called historic premillennialism (Post
Tribulation). It is termed “historic”
for two reasons: to differentiate it from modern premillennialism and to indicate that it was the historic
position of the early church … This
view is based on a literal interpretation of what the Bible says will
happen in the End Times. One of its
distinctive features is that it places the Rapture of the Church at the end of
the Tribulation, combining it with the Second Coming as one event.”

“This is the only systematic view of end-time events that existed
during the first 300 years of the Church. … Justin Martyr, who was born in
A.D. 100, went so far in his writings on the subject as to suggest that anyone with a different viewpoint was
heretical.”

“Those today who disagree with this view [HPM view] respond to the near unanimity of the early Church
Fathers by saying they [the early church
fathers] were simply wrong in their interpretation of the prophetic
Scriptures.”

“Yet their concept of
end-time events should not be dismissed out of hand as crude or primitive, for anyone who has studied the prophetic
Scriptures will have to admit that the Church Father’s viewpoint presents a
plain sense summary of the Bible’s teachings about the end times.” (The bold emphasis is mine. The brackets are
mine. The parenthesis are in the original text)

Additionally, in
a public venue, Dr. Reagan is reported to have made yet another emphatic
statement along these same lines. The event was a prophecy conference in
Athens, Georgia. The claims are made by a man named Richard H. Perry. Mr Perry,
reportedly, was at the conference and recorded Dr. Reagan’s words. Following is
what Mr. Perry asserts at his website:

“Some time ago, I
attended a Prophecy Conference at the Hebron Christian Church near Athens, GA.
The church hosted Dr. David Reagan from the Lion and Lamb Ministries of Dallas,
Texas."

"Dr. Reagan made a
shocking admission during one of his presentations. He said, “There is not one
verse in the Bible which states that the Rapture will take place before the
Tribulation.” Dr. Reagan, however, continuously proclaims a pre-tribulation
rapture even though he admits there is no verse which states this position.”

By the way, I
categorically agree with Dr. Reagan's supposed claim. There truly is not one
verse in the Bible which states that the rapture will take place before the
Tribulation. For many years, I have asked PT believers to provide that one
verse for me. They can't do it.

And, I don't mean verses wherein one must
"read into" the verse to "make" it say that. I mean, show
me the verse that clearly says, in no uncertain terms, that the rapture will
take place before the days of Antichrist and the tribulation period. It simply
is not there. Apparently, Dr. Reagan is also keenly aware of this inconvenient
fact. Obviously, the early church knew this truth as well. Not only did they
know this truth - but they also knew why the verse wasn't to be found - because
it simply wasn't the position of the early church. If it was their position, it
would have been easy enough to clearly spell it out in the scriptures.

However,
regardless of Mr. Perry's claim, if we simply take the most emphatic points
that Dr. Reagan pens in his own book, we can factually conclude that his
overall position is as follows:

·HPM is the oldest
viewpoint of Christianity concerning eschatology. [It therefore began with
those people who were closest to Jesus himself, and the first generations that came from the
time of Jesus. This would include Peter, James, and John – the first pastors of
the first church, and collectively the writers of seven New Testament documents.]

·HPM is based
upon a literal interpretationof what the scriptures actually say in the
matter of eschatology. [It is therefore not
based upon a “symbolic” interpretation – as is often accused by those of the PT
persuasion.]

·HPM was the
only systematic view of eschatology for at least the first 300 years of the
early church. [Much longer than the United States of America has been in
existence.]

·HPM was
the nearly unanimous version of eschatologyof the early church. [There
were only a very few of the earliest scholars who even came close to saying
something like the PT teaching of today. They were summarily dismissed by the
vast majority of those early scholars. Again, these early church “fathers” were
the people who were the very closest to the original teachings of Jesus, and
the original disciples, on matters of eschatology.] (All bracketed words are mine)

To be fair to the true context of Dr. Reagan’s book “Wrath
and Glory,” we do have to admit that Dr. Reagan ultimately falls into the camp of
those claiming that the early church fathers, “were simply wrong in their
interpretation of the prophetic Scriptures.”Dr. Reagan is a wholesale pre-tribulation rapture proponent, and his book makes this point crystal clear.

However, I choose to stick with what those who were the closest to Jesus, as well as His disciples and the generations after them, believed and
taught. I prefer to hold the view that does indeed have several very pointed verses declaring it as a fact, is the literal and historic view, and was clearly taught by Jesus. Certainly the original Church fathers would have learned their
foundational understanding of doctrine and eschatology from Jesus himself - right? How could this not be so? (See these scriptures to hear the disciples say so themselves:
1 Thessalonians 4:15, 2 Peter 1:12-16, 2 Peter 3:2, 1 John 1:1-3.)

Therefore, to go forward almost 1,500 years from the time of Jesus and the first disciples and then introduce a relatively new (and “strange”) teaching, and then further proclaim that the PT
doctrine is the only “real” understanding of eschatology, and that the early
disciples and scholars were “simply mistaken” -is absolutely nonsensical. And, biblically dangerous as well.

The Simple, Contextual Truth

I won’t bore you with a
lengthy verse–by–verse discourse on the matter. Rather, I will simply present a single, very
straightforward, and contextually-biblical rationale for holding the historical
premillennialist view – just like the earliest disciples did.

The bottom line is this – it’s what Jesus plainly
declared.

Luke 17:26-28, 30

"Just as it was in the days of Noah,
so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. People were eating, drinking,
marrying and being given in marriage up
to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them
all. It was the same in the days of Lot.
It will be just like this on the day
the Son of Man is revealed.”

"It will be just like this." This is a huge clue.

Jesus says we can know the “pattern” of the
last days, and of His ultimate return, by referring to the biblical/historical
blueprint of the days of Noah and of Lot. Jesus said that the days of His return would
be “just like this.” There really is no room to parse His words, or to
adjust the very obvious biblical pattern of both Noah’s and Lot’s day.

So, what was the pattern? As a matter of fact - both patterns are identical. There’s no
way around it.

Have a look:

1. Noah and Lot
both lived in the midst of the “great
tribulation” of their day. In both times, the days were so exceedingly wicked
that God pushed the reset button on their cultures and utterly destroyed the
civilizations involved. In Noah’s day, the judgment/wrath was the global flood. In Lot’s day it
was the megalopolis of Sodom and Gomorrah being buried alive by fire and
brimstone raining down upon them. Neither Noah nor Lot (and their families)
were “taken out” of the great tribulation of their days. Instead, they were left to live in the midst of it as witnesses. And God not only used
them as witnesses of the coming judgment of the Lord, but he also protected them in the midst of the days of “great tribulation.”

2. Both Noah and
Lot, however, were indeed “taken out” justbefore the wrath of God came upon their
worlds. Noah was “lifted up” in the ark.Lot was “taken out” by two angels who were sent to collect God’s people,
before His wrath fell upon the city.

3. After Noah and
Lot were “raptured,” the wrath of God fell upon those “left behind.” The
objects of God’s wrath were the unbelievers and the tormentors of God’s
witnesses during the days of “great tribulation.” Those during the days of Noah's and Lot's great tribulation had no
excuse. God’s faithful witnesses had lived
among them, right up until God brought His wrath.

There are those who will argue: “But Noah
and his family were taken inside the ark for seven days before the flood came. This represents the
“rapture” - out of the great tribulation.”

(Genesis 7:1-10)

There are several major contextual problems
with this position.

First, there is no such corresponding
position with regard to Lot and his family. And Jesus said that His coming
would be just like both the days of
Noah and Lot. He did not say His coming would be just like Noah's day,
but only similar to Lot's.

Also, when we read the text of Genesis 7
closely, we discover that they were sent to the ark for a very specific purpose: to
collect and care for the animals that God was now bringing to them. There was
work to be done. This was not a matter of a safety-escape for Noah's family (they were always in mortal danger) - it was a matter of completing the kingdom work of God before God's wrath fell.

However, they were still living in the midst of the terrible
tribulation of their day. God was protecting them, as He had always done, but
they were not yet “taken out.” That would happen on the day the flood waters
“raised” them up safely in the ark. Also, we are told in Genesis 7:7 that: “And
Noah and his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives entered the ark to escape
the waters of the flood.”

Do not miss this point. To say that being in the ark for those seven days "represents" the "rapture" - is flatly admitting that the PT version of interpretation, using this argument, is using an argument of symbolism - and not the literal, plain sense meaning of the passage. After all, doesn't the Genesis 7 account actually say that they were to go into the ark for a very specific logistical purpose? Yes it does. Yet, there is no mention of going to the ark to "escape the tribulation." Not even a hint.

Exactly. They were in the ark completing the
work of preparing the animals, and to eventually escape the wrath of God, poured out through the vehicle of the global flood. That's literally what the scripture says. Surely, during those days, they must have even gone in and
out of the ark – as they were making final preparations and adjustments, and
caring for the animals? They were not in
the ark to escape the tribulation of the world they lived in. Noah and his family were not “hiding” in the ark – they were working – preparing to be “raptured out” just before the
flood.

So, once again, the pattern of Noah and Lot
is as follows:

1.The world and culture grew increasingly evil.

2.Finally, the wickedness and perversion reached an apex. The great tribulation period of their day had arrived, and God’s
judgment was about to fall.

3.Both Noah and Lot were not “taken out” during
those days of evil (tribulation). They lived in the midst of those days, but
protected - - as the Lord’s witnesses to the world of His coming judgment.

4.But, before God’s wrath fell upon the world
of Noah and Lot, God “raptured them.” He “delivered them.” He “took them out.”

5.Then,
the wrath of God fell … Noah’s flood – and the utter inhalation of Sodom and
Gomorrah. But, God’s people were gone.

And don’t forget. Jesus said that the last
days would be “just like this.”This is
a huge reason (but far from the only one) why I am not a PT follower. Because, Jesus wasn’t. Neither was
the early church – for over 300 years. And their position was because of what Jesus clearly proclaimed. Neither have the majority of serious
scholars been pretribulation rapture believers – for the last 1,500 years.

Even Dr. Reagan clearly understands these facts.

The PT Argument

There are those who will argue against everything I have stated thus far, by saying something like this: "Yes, but Jesus was talking to the Jews when he said those things. He wasn't talking to the church."

This position is nothing short of sloppy contextual interpretation. But, I understand why they say it. The ardent PT crowd has to say something like this, otherwise the PT position goes out the window, based upon the contextual biblical facts I have already stated.

However, here's the truth. Jesus was, of course, talking to the "Jews." His original disciples were Jews. But they would also become the first pastors and "fathers" of the church. Peter, James, and John were the co-pastors of the first church at Jerusalem. The Gentiles were not brought into the church for years, after Paul received his call to aggressively take the Gospel to the Gentiles.

To make this particularly out of context PT argument would actually mean that practically everything Jesus said was "only" for the Jews, because practically everything He said was delivered to a primarily Jewish audience. Including practically everything He said about the salvation that He was affecting. Was that only for the Jews as well?

Simply put, the Gentiles have no "special" claims to the "church." Read Ephesians 2-3. The "one new man" is both Jew and Gentile, under the blood of Jesus - becoming the "real church," the new "temple" of the last days. There is "no Jew, or Gentile" under Jesus Christ. We are all a part of the "same body" with the "same Holy Spirit." There is not one view of eschatology for the Jews and another one for the Gentiles. What Jesus said in Luke 17 was forthe church.Everyone who is under the blood during the days of the return of Jesus are the ultimate recipients of these truths that Jesus laid out. Those days, Jesus said, would be like the days of Noah and of Lot. His words were the blueprints for the church, in order that they might understand how the last days events would unfold. Jesus could not have been any plainer in his speech.

Yet Another Example Pattern

By the way, the children of Israel being
brought out of Egypt, and eventually into the Promised Land, follows the very same pattern of Noah and Lot.They were
in slavery. Their world, and the persecution of that world, continually railed against them. And it grew increasingly
horrid. They lived right in the midst of their day of “great tribulation.”

God only “took them out” just before His
wrath fell – the death of all firstborn in Egypt. How did God’s people escape?
They had to get under the blood of the lamb. But, on the night of God’s wrath, the
children of Israel were “taken out.” Interestingly, the Children of Israel were "protected in the midst of " their time of great tribulation - in the land of Goshen (Genesis 45:9-10). While the plagues were falling upon Egypt - God's people still lived in the midst of Egypt - but none of the plagues effected them. Yet - when the final one came (God's Wrath), the death of the first born - that's when God "took them out" (raptured). But, only those who were under the "blood of the lamb." See the pattern? It's everywhere. But pre-tribulation rapture is ... well ... nowhere.

Additionally, the Children of Israel were actually “taken out” again at the parting of the Red Sea –
just before Pharaoh’s armies descended upon them. God’s people escaped with
their lives – the Egyptians fell under God’s hand of judgment and died. The
patterns are there, if we care to see them. That’s why Jesus told us “just how
it would be” before His ultimate return.

Conclusion

So, why do I believe the historic pre-millennial view? Because I believe what the early church believed. Apparently, they believed exactly what Jesus
and the disciples taught them. The scriptures plainly tell us that the church of our day will live under
increasing persecution and times of sorrow and tribulation. Tribulation is what
the world brings, not God. Do not confuse “tribulation” with “God’s wrath.”
They are two very different things.

We have been left here as witnesses and
ambassadors of the soon coming Kingdom. We are also to be “prophets” and
“preachers” of the quickly approaching wrath of God. But, just before His wrath falls, we will be “taken out” and then we
will return with Jesus Christ to rule and reign with Him – forever.

For these reasons, and dozens more
contextual biblical reasons like them – I am a historic premillennialist – and
not a follower of the pre-tribulation teaching. I am willing to be proven incorrect. But, the "proving" of it must be done
contextually – and thoroughly. And the “proving” must (for starters) take into account what
Jesus said concerning the days of Noah and Lot – contextually.

I follow the words of Jesus, and the
contextually connected Word of God (from Genesis to Revelation) and not the
clever inventions of "teachers" who often are guilty of distorting the Word of God to fit their own selfish agendas. My only agenda is truth, no matter how uncomfortable or inconvenient that truth may be. My goal is not to "work out a way" that I and/or the church won't have to "go through tribulation." Jesus said, "In this world you will have tribulation." (John 16:33) Again, His words cannot be parsed.

In the meantime, it would be nice if I were
wrong. In fact, this is the only issue of doctrine that I actually hope I am wrong about, regarding my interpretation of it. It would be wonderful that if during the days of tribulation, the
Antichrist, and the evil days of the very last time period just before God
pours out his wrath, the church could “escape” from having to live in those
evil days. The problem is, most of today’s “church” is living tribulation-like day, right now. And Jesus said they would be doing so, throughout the last days (i.e. Noah and Lot).

In our day - think Arab Spring. Think of the extinction of entire Christian populations throughout
the Middle East. Think of the parents that were forced to watch the raping and mutilating of their tortured children.

Think China - and the unspeakable atrocities against the church that consistently flow out of that country on a weekly basis. And, don't forget North Korea, or the 57 Islamic nations of the world. Do a little research on the statistics concerning the tribulation-status persecution of the church in those nations. And, it's going to get worse. A lot worse.

Consider what’s
happening in the United States right now. Just because your favorite football
team is playing, and the corner coffee shop is open, doesn’t mean all is right
with the world. There has never been as much persecution and tribulation of the
Church – in the history of the Church – as there is right this very moment.

So, where’s the rapture that supposed to
“take us out” of those tribulation days? According to the literal interpretation of God's Word, it’s coming!But - not yet. It
will happen (like Egypt, Noah, and Lot), but it will happen just before God
pours out his wrath on that great and terrible Day of The Lord.The early disciples and church fathers knew
all this. They knew it because Jesus told them about it. That's why they stood in what we now call the historic premillennial position of eschatology.

And, that’s where I stand. So, by the words of Jesus, and even Dr. Reagan - I'm not a "heretic," unless one wants to call the earliest disciples, Jesus himself, and the early church scholars heretics. Nor am I theologically off-base, or "interpreting the Bible symbolically."

Nevertheless, I will not argue or fight with anyone concerning where I stand in this matter. I have only laid out a very small sample of
my overall case. I could write an entire book on this topic with a dozen more examples like I have already laid out. (That book may be in the works soon, by the way). But my words here (and Jesus’ words), speak for themselves.

Now, let us faithfully advance the Kingdom
of Jesus together. Let us be faithful where we are. We have been raised up for
such a time as this. Esther said it best, when faced with her own days of tribulation, "If I perish - I perish."

Never doubt, God will provide for His faithful ones – even
in the midst of great tribulation - and afterwards, we will dwell in the house of the Lord forever.

May the Lord bless you and keep you -
always.

Fight the fight, finish the race, keep the faith.

Pastor Carl Gallups

Do you want to know what the Bible really says about a "Third Temple" being built on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem? Prepare for another shock...